I tend to ignore virtually all boycott demands, so even if I hadn't been mad enough to be trying to write a novel in 31 days, I wouldn't have had much to say about the Great Chick-fil-A controversy. However, as the whole thing begins to die back down into the background radiation of the culture war, it strikes me that this fracas in particular provides a good example of how deeply uncomfortable people are with the idea of actually living in a pluralistic society.
Realistically speaking, when you go to buy a sandwich, the only belief of the sandwich purveyor you really count on is a belief in producing good sandwiches. However, we tend not to like to think that in buying a sandwich we're helping someone who holds beliefs which are odious to us. As last week's convulsions showed, this is very much the case even with those who claim that they like a pluralistic society. The same people who pride themselves on seeking out racially mixed neighborhoods and ethnic cuisines would not necessarily be pleased were they to know that those picturesque "others" actually hold beliefs that are, well, other. People may like the idea of a pluralistic society, but in reality they like to think that everyone they interact with agrees with them on the "important things".
I don't feel any differently. I also wish that I could mostly interact with other people who agreed with me on the issues that are important to me. However, I do feel that I have something of an outside view on the phenomenon in that I've always been aware that my views are sufficiently in the minority in the wider society that it's best to assume that virtually no one I interact with actually shares all my most deeply held religious and political convictions. Those who think of their views as being held by all sane and nice people seem far more likely to go into a tailspin when they find out that this is not actually the case.